Used Cooking Oil Powers Transatlantic Flights

Although many of the biofuels we report on in Design News are crop-based or derived from biomass such as plant wastes, we've also told you about biofuels derived from used cooking oil. Now, a weekly commercial transatlantic flight has begun with jets that run on the stuff.

On March 8, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines made its first regular jaunt using biofuel derived from recycled cooking oil. The plane, a Boeing 777-200, flew from Amsterdam Airport Schiphol to New York's JFK Airport. The weekly flights on KLM Flight 642 will transport passengers in the opposite direction, from New York to Amsterdam.

The achievement fulfills KLM's goal to use biofuel in 1 percent of its flights by 2015. It also represents the culmination of several years of testing and experimentation, including algae-derived fuel and bio-kerosene. The current jet fuel is a blend of biofuel derived from used cooking oil, which is equivalent to a bio-kerosene, and regular jet fuel, according to a blog on KLM's website. The biofuel content is somewhat less than 50 percent of the blend due to the limitations of supply, but up to 50 percent is allowable.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines has begun weekly transatlantic flights from New York to Amsterdam using biofuel made from used cooking oil. (Source: KLM Royal Dutch Airlines)

Last June, KLM Flight 705, KLM's first transatlantic flight on biofuel, carried government delegations on a Boeing 777-200 from Amsterdam to Rio de Janeiro for the United National Conference on Sustainable Development. Like Flight 642, this flight used fuel supplied by SkyNRG, which KLM co-founded in 2009 with Spring Associates and ARGOS (North Sea Petroleum). The fuel, which SkyNRG supplies to 15 carriers throughout the world, is made by US-based Dynamic Fuels.

The biofuel based on used cooking oil is the first to be approved by the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels as a 100-percent certified renewable jet fuel. The Roundtable is an international initiative consisting of farmers, governments, and non-governmental organizations interested in promoting sustainable biofuels. It uses third-party certification bodies to guarantee high standards in sustainability and working conditions throughout the biofuel production process.

Last year, KLM formed a partnership with a number of corporations that allows them to fly on flights powered by biofuel for a certain proportion of their total contracted flight volume, or on specific flight routes. The Biofuel Programme is intended to reduce the carbon footprint of the aviation industry and promote further biofuels development. Partners include Heineken, Siemens, Philips, and Nike.

Although from a fuels standpoint this isn't as cutting-edge as the 100-percent non-food jet biofuel we told you about used in a civil jet Canadian flight, it may be potentially farther-reaching. The combination of a major airline, the corporate biofuel program, and the transatlantic commercial flights will go a long way toward raising the visibility of biofuels and the reality of their use, not just their potential.

Well, I don't always wait for cost parity to buy the (truly) green alternative, depending to some extent on how badly the non-green alternative is hurting ecosystems and wildlife. The more damaging the non-green product, the more likely I'll pay more for green. Lots of people, although by no means a majority, vote this way with their pocketbooks.

Yes, Ann, I've seen the cost difference come down as well and it has affected my choices. The cost difference on many products has become negligible. When that's the case, I choose the more sustainable product. Also, sometimes -- such as lighting -- the sustainable product is often more economical if you calculate the long run.

Most studies I've seen have shown that US consumers won't pay extra for sustainable, eco-friendly products, but that's apparently been shifting over the last few years: some definitely will, and the cost difference has shrunk.

Thanks for the explanation, Rob. I agree, the US is still catching up with Europe in that regard, but it does seem to be happening. I'd say one definition of "significant traction" is the increase in laws banning single-use plastic bags, which consumers (meaning everyone who buys anything) voted for. Another is definitely not buying/boycotting non-green products, which has certainly happened in the US. Greenwashing or not, more consumers are buying more "green" products.

Ann, what I meant by significant traction is just what you explained, that consumers are making their voices heard when it comes to green products, I know that European consumers have been willing to pay a premium for green products for some time. I also know that US consumers have lagged in this area. Maybe not any longer.

Rob, I don't know how specific the link from a consumer's pocketbook to a company's profits has been in the US. But that's not the only way they make known their demands--another is the voting booth--and everyone in bioplastics has told me consumer demand (meaning from everyone who buys anything) is what drove the changes--not to mention the entire sustainability movement. What do you mean, exactly by "significant traction"?

Hey, Ann, I didn't realize consumers were making their voice heard on bioplastics. Are they voting with their pocketbooks? I knew Europe and Japan had consumer bases that preferred green, but I didn't realize that green had gained significant traction in the U.S.

University of Southampton researchers have come up with a way to 3D print transparent optical fibers like those used in fiber-optic telecommunications cables, potentially boosting frequency and reducing loss.

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.